Through countless inspirational speeches and building relationships with each and every one of his students, Clark perfectly assumes the “hero teacher” role. (Mr. Clark to the rescue!) However, films like this give all the credit to the teachers and none to the students themselves. Why should they [the students] not be praised for overcoming their own hardships? Likewise, the movie representation indicates that once a “good” teacher is present, the previously insurmountable obstacles no longer exist. According to an article written by Ohio University instructor Allison Ricket, “Promoting the hero narrative is akin to pointing at the few exceptions and exclaiming, ‘See! Everything’s fine!’ (2014),” instead of striving to reduce the odds against …show more content…
While the education system requires teachers to cover specific topics and schools to maintain certain test scores to keep their funding, such a strong emphasis on gaining “hard knowledge” (e.g. reading, writing, and arithmetic) takes away from the students acquiring “soft knowledge” (e.g. etiquette, social skills, and patience) in the classroom setting. In the movie, Mr. Clark claims to be a “specialist in raising standardized test scores,” yet this is not what really makes him - or any other person in his shoes - a good teacher. In his book, Ayers touches on this as he describes twelve myths about teaching. His major point on this mistaken belief is that “learning is not linear;” students are individuals who learn differently and at varying rates. Therefore, the “average” or “ideal” third grader, for example, does not exist, and teachers - like Mr. Clark - must teach to their students’ diversity. It is important to realize that this ability to adapt to the needs of their students is only one of many measurable traits attributed to good